MP math help please - I think I got screwed over by at least a factor of two

Like Dawn of the Dragons Community on Facebook!
Like Dawn of the Dragons Mobile Community on Facebook!

Welcome to Dawn of the Dragons official forums!
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Our 5th Planet Games Cafepress store is now open. You can buy merchandise for Dawn of the Dragons, and for our other fun games too! Visit the store by clicking here.

[...]
Edit: So 33 pack give you a 87% of getting atleast one of the item, or 89% of I understand Sycall logic

Specifically in this case you have three possible rewards from top tier: mach 1.5%, tomb 1.5%, enigma 1%. the other 6% of top tier items would be rerolls, therefor we can consider a basis of only 94 possible rewards. 90 of those are unwanted. So we calculate 90/94^33, which is getting only unwanted items in 33 rolls. result: 0,238. Means that on the flipside you have a "mere" 76,2% chance of getting one of those three items in 33 gambles.

And if you wanna calculate the average, it's 4/94, so approx 4.25% for mach, tomb or enigma, or an average of 23.5 rolls needed.

Though I must admit that the fact that the MP continues to state "total 10%" for top tier, even if you own several items, is HIGHLY misleading. It simply should not do that.

Good bye game - some great people here but I'm so tired of spending money for nothing when I could buy Xbox or steam games.

I quit the game a couple of weeks ago because of a similar situation came back to see this thread cause a friend pointed me to it. I dont have a lot of premiums so had maybe 1 or 2 of the Tier 1 rewards when I tried. Total attempts 30 at 15PC a piece and got nothing (except for the blue risk taker achievement). Essentially got very expensive potions. I didnt know the math was as funny as you guys describe here. I thought that "Total 10%" probability of a Tier 1 result meant a Total 10% chance to get a drop from the Tier 1 category. If the math works any other way, then the displayed probability in the MP is purposely misleading.

From first hand experience, I can say that the MP was an extremely demoralizing and frustrating experience. It made me dislike a game that I loved. I dont think people feel privileged in expecting a result when they spend money in a game. Premiums make a big difference in this game and people choose to spend money in good faith to try to improve their hero and be only moderately far behind instead of significantly far behind from the big hitters.

Anyways Claytonde, good luck, Im sure youll find something else to play where you will have more fun and where they will treat you fairly.

Note: My other forums account got blocked after I complained so I had to make another account.

well a lot of us have for years tried to tell them the over dependence on gamble only items behind open ended gambles is hurting the game. it took 4ish years to get them to make the exalted hero chest that at least semi dents the gamble wall for the named premiums at least (is still dozen or so halfium type generals that are nearly game altering as well that should be accessable).

really have never seen why they are so insistent on never doing direct reoffers of old premium and halfium items. its not something the players ever asked for. its not even like players would seem to mind if they upped the prices for future direct reoffers.

is an interesting thought to consider where the game would be if they did reduce the open ended gambles to a more manageable degree. but when you have players hearing about this or that game altering unit and then when they try to get it walk away with essentially nothing and still no where closer to it, what do they really expect to happen? gambles boxes are not so bad, provided there is something in place to cap the open ended nature that the misery pack currently has.

My point was that if 1.5 is not worth the PC for someone owning the top line is still close to that and unlikely to be worth it. New players just asume that tier 4 has like a cumulative chance so you roll get the premium u own and it goes next in list untill you get the next item - which is how I taught it worked on my first MP.
The way I was explained it back then was that it simply rerolls if you own the item so it's like you make a do over, which is painfull to know because you start rolling the dice again with same small chance

1% chance will always be a 1% chance. The odds don't change just because you happen to buy more. If that was how it worked then there would be an eventual 100% chance on any gamble.

but it does become increasing *unlikely* for a 1% result to not happen the more rolls you make. and after a point, the unlikelihood does become so great that it makes more sense to assume the 1% rate is likely a lie instead of you having that bad of luck.

yes you can flip a coin 1000 times and get all heads and the next flip will still be a 50/50 chance at heads, but that is a 1 in 1.07 x 10^301 chance of happening. at that point, all normal people will have long since said the coin is not truly fair as those are literally once in a life time if not once in an eon odds. is it possible, yes, is it likely in the real world no.

the fallacy is the belief that the odds change per roll. it is a misunderstanding of the cumulative odds of an event not happening after large numbers of rolls becoming lower.

Nope. The odds are still 1%. That means a person could still be really unlucky and never hit it in infinite tries. Oh and the 2nd is still 1% since the actual 1% chance doesn't change.

A) You clearly don't understand the concept of infinity.
B) You clearly don't understand the difference between the odds of each individual attempt and the odds of a series of attempts.
C) According to your logic, the odds of failing to throw heads on a normal coin is the same whether you check against 1 toss or if you check against 100 tosses. (You can rail about it all you want, but your odds of not throwing heads even once in a series of 100 tosses is NOT 50-50!)
D) It's clearly a waste of my time to try to continue this discussion.

EDIT: I suppose it's easily possible that E) You're just trolling.

In which case, D still applies.

Azure Bonds on NAG has risen from the dead! We are now a level 10 guild with full guild shop access. Come join us!

well until he takes the time to look up the phrase "cumulative likelihood function" and learn and understand what it is, he is just not going to get the point that is going over his head.

the simple fact is the longer an even goes without happening, the likelihood of it happening does increase assuming the assumed odds are true. its not that 100 fails make the next individual roll more likely to succeed, but that after a certain point, you just shouldn't get that main fails without a success happening.

the classic example is try to get 100 heads in a row. it essentially wont ever happen.

But if you already had 99 heads in a row, the chance that the next throw is heads is still 50%.

(Unless it's a weighted coin, then it's more)

Sound logic. If you have two sides of coin, your chance is 50/50 unless it is weighted. If you have a die with six sides, you have a 1/6 chance to get sides 1 to 6. If you have a die with 100 sides, you have a 1/100 chance to get sides 1 to 100.
The fact anyone can possibly think your chance is not 50/50 on a standard coin flip to get heads or tails is a sigh school teaching was not enough.

the simple fact is the longer an even goes without happening, the likelihood of it happening does increase assuming the assumed odds are true. its not that 100 fails make the next individual roll more likely to succeed, but that after a certain point, you just shouldn't get that main fails without a success happening.

THAT is the gambler's fallacy!

Past results have no bearing on future results and to think they do is exactly what the gambler's fallacy is all about.

Originally Posted by snowstar

the classic example is try to get 100 heads in a row. it essentially wont ever happen.

That is true, but if you've already gotten 99 heads in a row, the odds of getting number 100 are 50-50, assuming a fair coin.

The difference is whether we're looking at a series of events before or after they have happened. The odds of flipping heads on a fair coin before you flip it is 50-50, but the odds of having flipped heads once you've flipped it is either 0 or 100 depending on what you flipped.

The cumulative odds that affects the likelihood of an event, sending the odds to 1 the more tries that are included only applies to FUTURE events. Events which have already happened have no effect (for independent events like coin flips) on the cumulative odds.

Azure Bonds on NAG has risen from the dead! We are now a level 10 guild with full guild shop access. Come join us!

There's just a slight difference between "throw a coin 100 times and tally how many heads you got." and "throw a coin 1 time and add it to an already existing result of 99 tails". Your position requires us to ignore the probability involved with having obtained those 99 consecutive tails. You just want to take them as a given and then say only the last throw matters and it is 50-50 therefore the entire process was 50-50.

Again, I know you're being a massive troll here and I shouldn't feed you, but as I said, I'm bored.

*shrug*

EDIT: This almost makes me want to start up a Monty Hall thread again. It's been about 2 years since the last round.

Last edited by Ahlyis; 6th December 2017 at 02:03.

Azure Bonds on NAG has risen from the dead! We are now a level 10 guild with full guild shop access. Come join us!